Does any-one know if the fire selector on a mk2 Sten has to be welded to the frame to semi auto position to be legal for a U.K. old spec ( pre 1995) de-activation, please?
Printable View
Does any-one know if the fire selector on a mk2 Sten has to be welded to the frame to semi auto position to be legal for a U.K. old spec ( pre 1995) de-activation, please?
IIRC the fire selector was fully functional on my old-spec MkII Sten. However, if that was how your one was originally certified then it would be unwise to cut any welds to release it.
Not got a Sten but the auto/semi auto button still works on my old spec MP44.
I have a very old one and it still works. I understand that it really was down to the dealer. Some did the very basics/all that was required of them. While others went over the top and cut this that and the other, roughly welded here and there, pinned here and there etc. I saw an old Sterling where even the butt had been welded open at the return spring cap.
I would half, sort-of, advisedly and most respectfully slightly disagree with Peregrine (thread 2) about UN welding. Because if the spec says, say that the butt doesn't have to be welded to the return spring cap or the selector didn't have to be welded solid, then in law, as defined, it needn't be. After all, democratic law tells you what you CANNOT do whereas only in a dictatorship do they tell you what you CAN do. A bit like the MoT garage (the annual roadworthiness test for cars in the UK) telling you that the interior and glovebox lights must work before he'll MoT your car. You can fix them if you like, but if you UNfix them afterwards, it ain't an offence. Just my take on things I have to say on this rainy Sunday morning in Oxfordshire. Forget that....., the sun has started to shine
I've just had a look at my Sterling and that was deact in 2004 and is therefore a new spec (well the older version of new spec as they seem to keep changing things) and it still has a moving selector switch (though the trigger is welded up) so I guess the fire selector must be ok to move otherwise I presume the proof House wouldn't of given it a certificate? That said I also have a L1A1 which was deact in 2008 and that has the trigger and safety switch welded up solid. I'd say Peter has got it correct when he says it depended on who the dealer etc was and how they interpreted what they needed to do? I'd be tempted to do as Peter kinda hinted at and free the bugger off...if someone had already freed it off prior to you getting it you'd be none the wiser anyhow to what had happened...
I have a SIII 1/2 ton Lightweight Land Rover, it's a 1983 build so therefore is required to run on the modern reflective number plates...which basically look crap, so I don't and use the older black and silver types instead. Anyhow come MoT time I used to just put the reflective plates on, do the MoT, drive out and then swop them back. One year I forgot to change them but I still had the newer plates lying in the back so I said to the MoT man do you want me to swop the plates, he just said no, what's the point, first thing you are gonna do is drive out the gates and swap them back again! Another one of the UK's stupid rules...Quote:
A bit like the MoT garage (the annual roadworthiness test for cars in the UK) telling you that the interior and glovebox lights must work before he'll MoT your car. You can fix them if you like, but if you UNfix them afterwards, it ain't an offence.
I agree that nothing is likely to ever come of it if the OP cuts the weld to release the fire selector. However, I would still maintain that it is 'best practice' not to interfere with the deactivation work - especially in the case of a gun done to a previous specification. Deactivation standards aren't retroactive, but only if there are no alterations to the original deactivation work. (i.e. it is still as originally certified)
It may have been welded in foreign service, did the Indians not do a semi only version for Police? Perhaps also it was a UK permissible semi before the ban.
Good point. That would make more sense than the RFD randomly deciding to weld the selector during deactivation.
Thank-you for your views on the matter chaps. I did hear or read some-where that there were a few semi auto Stens produced/converted at some point but I don't know any details. Seems a bit strange to want a semi auto only sten. Was it the French S.O.E.??? The Sten in question is a Long Branch example; I did wonder if it was originally a foreign spec de-acc, perhaps Canadian spec, but was then brought up to U.K. spec when imported to the U.K. Perhaps one of our Canadian cousins can tell us if a Canadian spec de-acc Sten has to have a welded fire selector, please?
You are obviously ware that it is offence to use those plates and so please don't moan when you get nicked by a switched on Traffic cop. I'll be up to about £200 and three points. He/she may cut you some slack as long as you promise to fix them and don't use expressions like "stupid rules" when saying sorry.Quote:
Originally Posted by Time Bandit
I see the point Beery - but really, some of these road traffic rules and regulations are so trivial as to be seen as senseless in some eyes. And you can see why 'offenders' in this kind of case go away muttering under their breath when confronted by a constable wielding a book of tickets. There is very occasionally a purge on motorists travelling into Oxford at rush-hour no less - not wearing seat belts...... On the Botley or Abingdon Road where due to the sheer volume of traffic is, according to a private survey, carried out by one defendants solicitors, was 6mph! He argued for, and got an absolute discharge...... I could go on. I don't think the offence of fancy or illegally spaced number plates is an endorsable offence.
No wonder they call them 'ticket touts' around here! Sorry to sound negative but I was stopped for it too. The difference is that I DID have my belt on but the clown insisted that I would have to take a ticket and dispute it in Court................ Sometimes, and it's happened to EVERYONE on this forum, you have to ask yourselves '[.......haven't they got criminal matters to deal with? Just my oblique look at life as an older more laid back now sort of bloke
I hear that Thames Valley have a very good reputation amongst FAC holders as well. :-)
Yup, I'm well aware. I'm guessing the last traffic plod I seen wasn't really switched on or had better things to worry about?Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerhunter
Stupid rules? Well ok I'm sure they have a reason for it but why? Fair enough the plates are the wrong colour but apart from that what difference does it make? The plates are the correct size, the font is the correct size, the font has the correct spacing unlike half the boy racer and personalized plate types with the italic fonts and dodgy spacing? I presume they still can be read by the ANPR and Speed cameras otherwise any pre 1973 vehicle with the old type plates will be invisible to the cameras.
So stupid rules is maybe the wrong description but it's got to be something like a pointless rule then? I can understand it when people get nicked for the iffy fonts and the likes, that's fair enough but to be done for a perfectly legible plate? Just think of all that paperwork you'd save if you ditched that particular law...
Let's start with: the modern (post 1972 IIRC) number plates are reflective for road traffic safety reasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by Time Bandit
I know some people with British Military Vehicles who, having researched the original Army registration number, have a set of black and silver plates which, having driven to an event with the lawful plates, pop the plate with the original registration over them at the event.
True enough and yes I know I should respect the law and abide by it and all that but sometimes it just seems daft? Is a 1971 Lightweight Land Rover deemed safe on the older type plates? Yes, according to the law it obviously is, so why is mine which is an identical truck (near enough) but built in 1983 (and with the brighter, more visible 'Bug Eye' lights!!) suddenly unsafe in the eyes of the law if I don't use reflective plates? Surely if mine is unsafe then all cars on non reflective plates are unsafe and the law should reflect (doh...sorry) this and all vehicles, regardless of age, should be fitted with them?Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerhunter
I'd say if anything an older car is the one probably in more need of extra illumination and the reflective number plates would probably be of more use on them where the lights and reflectors could probably do with a bit of 'assistance' in the seeing and being seen department! I guessing one argument to that would be that older cars are mostly (but not always) 'collectors' type cars and not driven that often which is a valid point but...it only needs to be driven once for it to have an accident? Modern cars are usually that well lit up nowadays that needing a reflective number plate to help see it is a bit unnecessary?
Oops...I think this thread has gone of course a bit, apologies to the opening poster!